In Michigan, local districts, intermediate school
districts,* community colleges, and state universities
are all eligible to authorize charter schools.
But only state universities can authorize schools
anywhere in the state. The others only can authorize
schools in their own geographic area.
State universities have been the most active authorizers
in Michigan, and among these, Ferris
State University (FSU) has been one of the most
active and effective authorizers.

Teacher unions are very powerful in Michigan, a
historically pro-labor state, and typically oppose
charter schools. This powerful opposition has created
anti-charter sentiment among many school
boards and in many communities, where charter
schools are seen as a threat to district schools.
Statewide authorizers, such as FSU, are typically
more willing to open charter schools than local
districts, irrespective of politics.

FSU has an enormous stake in the success of its
charter schools. As a state university with mostly
in-state students, its own success depends
greatly upon the academic and personal growth
of Michigan's K–12 students. The university's efforts are also very visible and answer to several
types of constituents—the governor, investors,
alumni, and the academic community. The
university's interest also is tied to its own academic
reputation and financial security.

FSU's charter schools office seeks to improve education
options for students in urban and rural
communities throughout Michigan. They meet this
goal by authorizing high-quality charter schools
across the state that offer a quality education option
where the traditional schools have failed.

FSU's charter office is accountable ultimately to
the university's board of trustees, which has the
final say on all decisions about charter approval,
renewal, and closure. Current board members
are primarily pro-charter and generally
have acted based upon the recommendations
of the FSU charter office's staff. The board does
not set policy or guide the office's mission, but
rather ensures that no charter school poses a
serious risk to its own students' safety or to the
university's reputation as a high-quality authorizer.
Policies and mission are left to the office
staff to determine.

Staff members report that their level of resources
is sufficient. The office receives all of its funding
from a 3 percent fee assessed from each charter
school, but the office’s facility is subsidized by the university. FSU is able to return almost a full
1 percent of its funding to the schools in the form
of incentives, grants, technology (such as software),
and cash awards. Michigan has high perpupil
funding for charters, which ensures that
authorizers have better than ordinary financial
resources from their withholding of a percentage
of these funds. FSU currently requires no sources
of funding outside of the 3-percent fee.

FSU collaborates with several other university
authorizers in Michigan. For example, FSU has
partnered with Central Michigan University to
track student performance data and develop a
compliance software program that it likely could
not have developed on its own. The combined
effort also allowed both organizations greater
influence with the Michigan Department of Education
in regard to gaining access to student
scores on the Michigan Educational Assessment
Program (MEAP) statewide tests. These authorizers
also share best practices with each other.

FSU also depends on the Michigan Council of
Charter School Authorizers, the Michigan Association
of Public School Academies, the National
Charter Schools Institute (based in Michigan),
and the National Association of Charter School
Authorizers for perspectives about the areas in
which FSU is excelling or is in need of improvement
and for resources that FSU has used to
improve its authorizing practices.

FSU is not engaged in active recruitment, but
has found most of its charter applicants as a
result of FSU's visibility within statewide organizations
that support charter schools. FSU has
a reputation among charter operators and authorizers
as being "tough but fair," in the words
of FSU's charter office's former director Jimmie
Rodgers, meaning that it holds its schools to stringent standards but provides them the best
support they can for meeting those standards.
FSU's reputation and visibility in the state have
meant that FSU has not had to do much recruitment
to find charter applicants.

Currently, however, a legislative cap22 on charter
schools in Michigan hinders FSU's ongoing
authorizing abilities. Public universities in
Michigan are allowed to authorize a total of
150 charter schools, a number that was reached
several years ago. FSU must work in collaboration
with the other university authorizers to
decide which authorizer will oversee any new
charters that come available. While there are
additional charters available for two special
types of charter schools that are exempt from
the cap—Strict Discipline Academies and Urban
High School Academies—FSU has been able to
find only one talented applicant for these kinds
of charters. Because FSU is not willing to lower
its quality standards, so far it has been able to
move forward with only one charter school under
these exempt programs since the exemptions
were established in 1999.

For 16 schools spread out across the state,
FSU has a five-person office staff and a fourperson
field staff. The office staff relies heavily
upon technology to make sophisticated ongoing
monitoring possible without significant staff
time. Pairing oversight and assessment technology
with field representatives has allowed the
staff to accomplish office administrative duties
while providing more face time in the schools
and at board meetings.

For schools that adequately meet expectations,
FSU provides ongoing support to ensure each
school's continued success. FSU collects a lot of
data on compliance and student performance and has the capability of analyzing it for a variety
of purposes. Staff members can track
student performance to certain aspects of schools'
operations, which allows them to get a better
sense of which school characteristics contribute
most to student learning and which detract from
performance. This information helps the staff
better advise their boards, target particular areas
of assistance to their schools, and often informs
their decisions at renewal time as well.

FSU requires schools to track scores from state
and national tests. FSU tracks Michigan Education
Assessment Program (MEAP) scores online
via the state's department of education Web
site, requiring no reporting from the schools.
Results from other tests can be submitted automatically
if the school uses the Scantron system.
FSU reviews monthly check registries from each
school and requires a quarterly financial statement.
Schools must annually submit a budget
and conduct an audit. At 36 months, they must
submit a statement regarding their fund equity.
FSU also requires evidence of compliance with
all FSU requirements as well as state and federal
laws and regulations. Financial and compliance
information is submitted through FSU's online
compliance monitoring system.

FSU's four field representatives work throughout
the state and are required to conduct six
site visits to each of their schools per year. They
also are required to attend at least six board
meetings per year; many attend several more.
Their visits result in written reports that are
submitted to the FSU authorizing staff, with reports
including information on school climate,
observations from classroom visits, degree of
parental involvement, facility conditions, and
planned future focus. The authorizing staff
also visits informally, both announced and unannounced. Informal visits provide staff with
useful information about the school and provide
school staff an opportunity to express any
concerns, but are not typically captured in a
formal report. Schools see staff members at
least 12 times per year, on average, at site visits,
at off-site training sessions, and at an annual
dinner for all charter school employees.

FSU staff persistently ask themselves if they are
near "The Line," referring to the line between
adequate oversight and infringing upon schools'
autonomy; between assisting schools and running
their day-to-day operations; and between
providing incentives for performance and overcommitting
their limited resources.

Signs of Success: Ferris State
University

In the 2004–05 academic year, the Michigan
Educational Assessment Program (MEAP)
showed FSU-authorized charter schools
gaining on the state proficiency averages.
In particular, the majority of FSU-authorized
schools moved students from Level 4, the
lowest of the MEAP performance levels, to
Level 3, the next higher level of scoring.

In the 2004–05 school year, 54 percent of
FSU-authorized charter schools made greater
gains on state MEAP tests in reading and
math in comparison to the local school district
in which each charter school is located.

In the 2004–05 school year, one FSU-authorized
school scored 100 percent proficient on
the science MEAP test. Three FSU-authorized
schools had 75 percent or more students scoring
proficient in math, science, or reading.

* In Michigan, local school districts are grouped into intermediate
school districts, which are regional services agencies that provide
various student and administrative services to their member districts.